Naval Battle League 2016-2018

[panzer1b]

5 hours ago, Alphasus said:

My core was the smallest type of girder, with fewer outbound connections. I think that design is inherently weak to impacts that deliver many simultaneous shocks to the craft.

Sofar that type of core is the absolute best thing you can use, despite its flaws.  The whole chain of XLs is too suceptible to being split, and well dies just as easily if not easier to drilling weapons like the SRM-6M (as in the weapon fires multiple times as the exact same spot cutting through and eventually reaching the core).  While it may seem dissapointing, i say stick with that basic idea, everything else is so lousy right now as armor that we dont have many alternatives.

The only solid hulls right now are based on the concept of a single root part with branches coming out in multiple directions, with the core itself heavily armored from all directions.  This design is inherently weak against anything that fires shot after shot into the same area (its all probability, a phasing round may or may not 1 shot ur ship every time, but if you fire multiple you stack probability against the enemy ship as every next shot adds considerably to teh odds of destroying that core (assuming your aim is top notch that is). 

Another viable hull ive come across is a semi-procedural build that takes advantage of multiple docking ports spread strategically throughout the ship so in the very likely event the core is toast, at least something remains intact.  It worked ok, near invincible against single shots, but multiple direct hist would eventually cut their way through all the spines and split it.

Really the only other option i can think of is highly redundant ships, which was something i tried back in 0.25, but the part count was an issue.  My idea was a ship that had something like 3-5 segments connected to each other.  There was a dedicated drive system (with nukes) in the back, a dedicated unguided weapons system (in the front) that carried a few ibeams and 2 RT10s, and the rest were fully self-sufficient mini warships that had their own guided weapons, fuel for both their own backup engines (if i remember correctly i used 2 24-77s per segment) and the main drives (although that was manually pumped to the rear because part counts were so bad i couldnt afford fuel lines), and their own control units (i think i just used probes back then since it wasnt a manned ship).  It worked well, and remained funtional even after being split in half, not to mention its armor was quite strong from the get go.  That said, those were different days, we are nolonger able to make such systems efficient because nukes require LF only and i cant just cram the entire ship with teh same fuel tanks to feed a wide variety of engines.  In 0.90 i actually had a ship that used the same concept (but relied on vernors to do the redundant engines) and that also worked so-so, but as with any ships of that type, the part counts go through teh roof and you are carrying alot of dead weight that may or may not be useful (until you are actually split apart there is no reason to have all those engines all over).

[curiousepic]

What do you think about a standard of setting target ships to a certain acceleration and/or rotation to reduce the effect of precision aiming and drilling weapons? Or, as I suggested previously, somehow have the target's orientation, and thus directional armor, matter (Whoever responded to me was right that SAS modes are cancelled when switching away from the ship, but perhaps with the Persistent Rotation Mod?)

Also, aren't fuel lines physics-less? Do they actually impact framerate?

Edited May 5, 2016 by curiousepic

[ScriptKitt3h]

13 minutes ago, curiousepic said:

What do you think about a standard of setting target ships to a certain acceleration and/or rotation to reduce the effect of precision aiming and drilling weapons? Or, as I suggested previously, somehow have the target's orientation, and thus directional armor, matter (Whoever responded to me was right that SAS modes are cancelled when switching away from the ship, but perhaps with the Persistent Rotation Mod?)

Also, aren't fuel lines physics-less? Do they actually impact framerate?

I'm personally a bit dismissive of the idea- trust me, I can understand where you're going, but it just seems like a bunch of extra complications to stock battles (something that already requires time and coordination to orchestrate), and forcing players to utilize a mod for a "stock" battle doesn't seem quite right either (I'm not against mods, but for this, things are best left stock).

AFAIK fuel lines are essentially physicsless but do behave somewhat like struts 

[panzer1b]

59 minutes ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

I'm personally a bit dismissive of the idea- trust me, I can understand where you're going, but it just seems like a bunch of extra complications to stock battles (something that already requires time and coordination to orchestrate), and forcing players to utilize a mod for a "stock" battle doesn't seem quite right either (I'm not against mods, but for this, things are best left stock).

AFAIK fuel lines are essentially physicsless but do behave somewhat like struts 

Forcing any mods is a bad idea period, at least in my perspective as the whole thing i enjoy is the challenge of combat with 100% stock KSP (well minus stuff like targetron which makes actually managing a battle possible once it becomes a debri field)...

Anyways, my solution to this is to disable SAS.  Its not a fix all solution, but it will at the minimum make it very difficult to hit the exact same spot multiple times as the 1st shot will start the ship in a spin.  That said, luckily there are limits to what you can do with a drilling style weapon.  The thing HAS TO be centralized to work well, and that means you have to have either a fully exposed weapon sticking out the front (thus easy to shoot off), or build it into the hull which lowers internal space for fuel and other systems (an issue with my Sk-CRV-IVg1).  You need to keep the missiles within a 1.25m profile, which makes ~8 shots the absolute maximum you can theoretically have (ive managed to create a SRM-8, but it was buggy and inaccurate thus defeating the purpose entirely).   If you have a offcenter launcher you can sortof hit the same spot event time but it requyires cockpit aim and knowing exactly where the missiles will hit relative to centerline (easier said then done).

 

 

Really, im starting to come to the same conclusion many othrs have come to, that armor can only go so far.  I havent given up my dream, and probably never will give up trying to create a ultra low part count extremely resilient vessel, but i think that armor right now is less important then it was since everyone is running around with weapons that can kill anything 90% of the time, and rarely even need to use all of their ordinance on a single target.  You need enough armor so that a single shot doesnt kill you, but trying to defend against the entire arsenal of a super heavy warship (100+t and 400+ parts) is just futile...

[curiousepic]

NavHud significantly aids with aiming.

I perfectly understand the desire to maintain a mod-free standard.  I also think it is fun to more accurately simulate multiplayer, and Persistent Rotation would help with that.

Edited May 5, 2016 by curiousepic

[curiousepic]

Speaking of simulating multiplayer, yesterday I loaded up a couple of Servo's D-62s to pit against each other in orbital maneuvering. I noticed they had a load of 6 deployable probes, which I assumed were decoys. I haven't seen any mention of decoys (at least in this thread) but they were a heck of a lot of fun to use, and it seems like they would be a huge (if unrealistic) part of multiplayer gameplay (if indeed they would work like I think, with the opponent not being able to distinguish them in map mode if labelled and named properly).  I had the defender deploy a few after getting an elliptical orbit I wanted, and randomized each one's orbit a bit. They have the potential to be a huge pain in your opponents ass, wasting their time and dV and probes of their own to scout and confirm the identity of each signature, assuming they have time to get an intercept within the dV limit of each probe... which I wasn't smart enough to be able to do before I gave up and chased down the signature I assumed was the ship at that point.  It wasn't   

It also seemed supremely easy, even without decoys, to flee an aggressor.  It all comes down to how much extra dV the aggressor is willing to spend.

Edited May 5, 2016 by curiousepic

[Alphasus]

Anyone want to test the successor to the Core? It is the Core 2 Mini, and has effectively an SRM-6 in the center of the ship.Core 2 Mini

I KNOW that dedicated ASMs will kill it, but it should be reasonably tanky and have nicer part counts.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Alphasus

[panzer1b]

55 minutes ago, Alphasus said:

Anyone want to test the successor to the Core? It is the Core 2 Mini, and has effectively an SRM-6 in the center of the ship.Core 2 Mini

I KNOW that dedicated ASMs will kill it, but it should be reasonably tanky and have nicer part counts.

Ill be honest and its complete fodder to anything based on ibeams...  SRM-6M will RELIABLY kill it 90% of the time (most trials left it with 1-3 shots leftover after it killed the spine).

You switched over to using a XL girder spine throughout teh entire vessel, something that cuts part count but comes at the cost of being fodder to most decently built weapons.

If you are looking for ideas towards your next ship try the concept that im working with right now.  You have a SINGLE stubby girder as your core, and attach at most 8 parts to said girder radially.  The rear node can be used to have a stack of fuel tanks (with optional engine on back), the front can be used to attach a docking port to mount a centralized weapon, or be used with fuel tanks.  A cockpit can also be placed either in front or in back of the girder.  Also, anything attached to said girder should have at least 1 strut going from it to the girder, and preferably also a few struts to other components that are touching the girder.  Build your entire ship up off of the parts that are attached to teh girder for optimal effect.

[Three1415]

I'm going to submit one of my own (albeit old and recently recovered--thanks Script for the tip) ships for weapons testing, because I make my armor rather differently from the rest of you, it seems, and I want to know better how it holds up in 1.1 (I can never must the malice necessary to attempt to destroy my own ships properly, alas). This is one of my old gunships, ~50 tons, 460 parts:

See below...

 

Edited May 6, 2016 by Three1415

[panzer1b]

16 minutes ago, Three1415 said:

I'm going to submit one of my own (albeit old and recently recovered--thanks Script for the tip) ships for weapons testing, because I make my armor rather differently from the rest of you, it seems, and I want to know better how it holds up in 1.1 (I can never must the malice necessary to attempt to destroy my own ships properly, alas). This is one of my old gunships, ~50 tons, 460 parts:

Craft file

 

Your link is broken...

[Three1415]

Noted--it seems to not like mediafire addresses? Trying again...

 

 

Edited May 6, 2016 by Three1415

[panzer1b]

3 minutes ago, Three1415 said:

Weird--I can't link anything at all. It just reverts to null as soon as I try to change it...

 

http://google.com

Just paste the link in plain text, i can just select it and copy it to the bloody URL bar like i normally would with links anyways (i dont trust those clicky ones so i avoid em unless i have no other option).

 

And yeah, squad banned mediafire (not that i care myself as i still use it, just forum will not make clickable links (you need to paste it in plain text).

 

Also, looking forward to giving it a shot as you are one of those people that always bring something new to the table (most of us including me until a few days ago were using drek styled internals with some modifications, they ofc suck in 1.1.2).  It appears that the best method for making ships is super heavily reinforced core with everything else branching off of it.  The whole idea of a skeleton made of XL girders seems to have died off with teh advent of my SRM-6M (basically a drilling ibeam cannon which is impossible to defend against when center mounted), and ofc RT-5s seem to have become far more lethal these days, a weapon that was mostly ignored in the past.

Edited May 6, 2016 by panzer1b

[Three1415]

7 minutes ago, panzer1b said:

8 minutes ago, Three1415 said:

Weird--I can't link anything at all. It just reverts to null as soon as I try to change it...

 

http://google.com

Just paste the link in plain text, i can just select it and copy it to the bloody URL bar like i normally would with links anyways (i dont trust those clicky ones so i avoid em unless i have no other option).

 

And yeah, squad banned mediafire (not that i care myself as i still use it, just forum will not make clickable links (you need to paste it in plain text).

Edited 1 minute ago by panzer1b

You can't--anything that looks like an address with "mediafire" in it (even in a code block) is auto-removed. Just append

download/28tg50yhkql3jwl/Lachrymeum_Class_Gunship_Mk_III.craft

onto the end...

Edited May 6, 2016 by Three1415

[panzer1b]

1 hour ago, Three1415 said:

I'm going to submit one of my own (albeit old and recently recovered--thanks Script for the tip) ships for weapons testing, because I make my armor rather differently from the rest of you, it seems, and I want to know better how it holds up in 1.1 (I can never must the malice necessary to attempt to destroy my own ships properly, alas). This is one of my old gunships, ~50 tons, 460 parts:

See below...

 

 

Its an older ship ive seen before btw (a long time ago for that matter, seen it in 1.0 if not earlier).  Well here is my review:

Armor is so-so, but comparing it to what is out there it is actually very good.  Its pretty comparable to my SK-CRV-IVg1 armor and firepower wise except its higher on part counts (but it does get better dV thanks to ions).  Now as for specific weapons, its decentish vs competitive torps, with my popper-H knockoff usually able to damage but not completely neuter it in 1 shot.  There was one try where the entire thing went poof-debri-cloud, but thats it.  As for SRM-6M, dies just like anything else, although its not a guaranteed death, and you need to manually fire every shot into the same area to guarantee a kill (turning off sas makes this feat much more difficult once it starts rotating).  RT-5s are so-so, ive had a few trials where the entire thing was split after the 2nd shot, and ive had trials where it took 4 direct hits with only a few chunks missing (but still fully functional).

Its defenetely a solid ship, especially with how miniscule it is, but it suffers from teh number one problem in this entire game, lack of part count efficiency (yes 1.1 has made high part counts workable, but myself i still try to make hulls that are under 200 parts).

 

 

 

Also, i dont know if its just me, but it seems that high end torpedoes like the popper-H seem to be inferior in terms of killing ability to things like ibeam stacks.  Only with tire based impactors does this change, but even then it is literally 75% luck as to whether the thing phases in and interacts with what we want it to interact with (namely the skeleton or core or whatever you want to call it).  There is a hull design component (ofc terribly built hulls will die way more often), but it seems that designing a hull specifically to defend against that type of weapon is a waste of time as the super powered ones rely on high mass and velocity (to the point you cant really make anything to counter a lucky shot), the tire impactor types just obliterate whatever they phase into every time, and the shrapnel ones are really the most hit and miss, sometimes with luck they will shred internals, sometimes they split a ship, sometimes they dont do jack.

Ibeams (specifically centrally mounted drilling models) are some of the most reliable weapons ive seen, with very few ships able to actually take more then a few hits before they get split.  The whole trick is to use cockpit aim (sometimes using the autoaim feature also does the trick but can be countered very easily by having your so called root part be somewhere far away from teh actual ship core) to direct more then 1 shot into the exact same spot, virtually nothing aside from excessively excessive thick plating can deal with this (in which case we are looking at some 1000-2000 part monstrosity). 

Now RT-5s seem to be a middle ground.  Certain ships seem to be extremely esy to kill with something as simple as a RT-5 with a decoupler atop it (not even any structural impactor).  From my experience anything sporting a drek styled interior seems to be the worst against these things.  By drek interior i mean a long spine of XL-3 girders off of which the fuel tanks and hull is attached to (i just call it a drek interior as the drek was teh 1st ship ive ever seen use such a core).  RT-5s are somewhat bad against multiple layered armor that is surrounding a single root part (hence why i started working with that style now), but even then multipke direct hits will just tear the ship apart.

 

 

All in all, as a few tips to anyone who is getting into combat, the single most part count efficient weapon is a stack of RT-5s separated by 1.25m decouplers (place either a decoupler on the 1st one in the stack or a nose cone if you liek appearance.  The thing isnt even that heavy either with a single round being around 1ton, and each round is 2 parts.  The other best general purpose weapon is a single long ibeam with 4 sepatrons pushing it.  These are less part count efficient then the RT-5s, but they are lighter, and most of all much easier to use in large numbers because they are smaller and can have like 8 or so jammed into the same cross sectional area that a single RT-5 takes up.  Great to carry 4-8 of them as backups (or even close range primaries), but generally you want to avoid spamming them as they make your part count go through the roof nomatter how you try to minimize that.  Otherwise, stick to long range torps, these are fairly reliable, multipurpose, and most of all futureproof as it looks like real time MP will all but kill short range munitions on anything that isnt an interdictor or otherwise excessively mobile, or a fighter (completely different playstyle and role though there).

Edited May 6, 2016 by panzer1b

[Canberra_Gaming]

I'm going to play the "lets make a proposition" game with everyone. Would everyone like to set up a GNBC series on YouTube? We can band together, write a story, get camera work and fun stuff done, record voices, create factions, make a world that feels alive. We could make something to rival @HatBat series. What says everyone? If anybody's interested and wants to talk privately about it, message me. We'll trade Skype information and ways to get in touch.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Canberra_Gaming

[Kerbal kerman]

Meow

[panzer1b]

4 hours ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

I'm going to play the "lets make a proposition" game with everyone. Would everyone like to set up a GNBC series on YouTube? We can band together, write a story, get camera work and fun stuff done, record voices, create factions, make a world that feels alive. We could make something to rival @HatBat series. What says everyone? If anybody's interested and wants to talk privately about it, message me. We'll trade Skype information and ways to get in touch.

Im in, but i dont use skype (its the worst piece of shat software ive ever come across as using it to do just voice makes the internet go from fiber optic speeds to dialup).

 

Anyways, im willing to help out with ship design, pretty much anything space based from starfighters to heavy capital ships, and i also have made a few land vehicles which range from useless to barely functional as i dont use BDA and prefer stock combat, which is actually very difficult to do well on the ground.  I dont quite have the time to devote myself full time or anything, but if you need help with other stuff (im actually decent with video editing minus special effects as the software i use lacks that) im glad to lend a hand, especially since both macey dean and hatbat seem to have gone MIA so we dont really have a single decent series being made anymore.

[Spartwo]

5 hours ago, Canberra_Gaming said:

I'm going to play the "lets make a proposition" game with everyone. Would everyone like to set up a GNBC series on YouTube? We can band together, write a story, get camera work and fun stuff done, record voices, create factions, make a world that feels alive. We could make something to rival @HatBat series. What says everyone? If anybody's interested and wants to talk privately about it, message me. We'll trade Skype information and ways to get in touch.

Get out of here, scram! I'm 6 months ahead of you.

[Canberra_Gaming]

59 minutes ago, Spartwo said:

Get out of here, scram! I'm 6 months ahead of you.

Do you have After Effects or premier?

[Spartwo]

Premier

(Ignore that boat with a black flag, I have nothing to do with it)

Huh, I never asked panzer back in November. Probably because he had something of his own going on.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Spartwo

[panzer1b]

36 minutes ago, Spartwo said:

Huh, I never asked panzer back in November. Probably because he had something of his own going on.

I ALWAYS have something going on, doesnt stop me from doing various projects, both fun and not so fun...

Currently im on summer break from college so i have time to have fun.  Working some on my KSP comic which is at most a side project i do when im in the mood.  I kinda stopped doing that for a while (fed up with lag), but now that 1.1's out and im done with my semester im working on next chapter a few pages a day (its taking way longer then i planned since i started photoshopping near every battle to add stuff like missile trails and muzzle flashes/cannon smoke, and when i have 500 pics to work with it takes a while).

That said, KSP is by no means the only game i play, although it is probably my favorite sofar (i really like the fact that its so open and you can do whatever you want, from destroying capital ships to the occasional peaceful refueling mission or whatever, that is ofc within the limits of game engine).  One other project im working on is skinning some vehicles for an older WW2 game, because im so fed up with the default textures that look worse then something from doom.  Didnt really have time to bother with that during semester as it requires like a week of work per tank i do (i prolly could do better but since i lack UV maps and have to match every seam manually, it takes forever to do).

As for time, i usually have lots of it, especially with the recently lousy weather that kinda keeps me from being outside for hours on end...

If anyone wants help with a series (i dont have video recording software but i could get it if needed) im game, just dont expect me to work on something 24/7 because while i may be a gamer, i do actually have a real life too.

 

 

In other news:  Im almost ready to release a new ship that i feel is my best sofar in terms of armor.  The hull is a bit high on parts, with the entire ship (+ weapons) at 330 atm, something im working on lowering.  That said, well worth it given its the first ship ive ever made that is truly competitive armor wise (weapons layout is another story).  Its primary issues are suceptibility of engines and weapons to being shot apart, somewhat vulnurable bridge (although better then older versions), and pitiful dV (2200 is nothing to brag about, but workable on most moons and duna). 

Weapons consist of 3 HSG hardpoints on the front, the center one intended to pack a SRM-6M, but always can be used to carry regular 1.2m torps, the sides normally carrying Tripedo-S or M weapons.  And ofc packs 8 KDrone-S for anti-fighter or harassment purposes.

[sdj64]

Two new ships!  Not ready for download yet though.  Tierra cruiser is 100 tons and 440 parts, Cielo Corvette is 30 tons and 230 parts.  The existing Aqua Destroyer is on the left.

 

It would be cool to have a youtube battle series that didn't have scripted battles.  Not sure what you all had in mind but it would keep it suspenseful to have only a general idea of the story (wars, starting territories, alliances) but the battles themselves determine the outcome.  At any rate, I don't have much video experience but I would be willing to take on a small role or just donate ships.

 

All this talk about repeated hit missiles has me wondering if a Kraken rotator could be made to rotate ships when they come into physics range.  Something that could be disabled when it's your turn so the ship could maneuver and aim, and enabled when the turn is over to spin the ship fast enough to avoid repeat hits in the same spot, but not fast enough that it breaks apart.

[Alphasus]

1 hour ago, sdj64 said:

Two new ships!  Not ready for download yet though.  Tierra cruiser is 100 tons and 440 parts, Cielo Corvette is 30 tons and 230 parts.  The existing Aqua Destroyer is on the left.

 

It would be cool to have a youtube battle series that didn't have scripted battles.  Not sure what you all had in mind but it would keep it suspenseful to have only a general idea of the story (wars, starting territories, alliances) but the battles themselves determine the outcome.  At any rate, I don't have much video experience but I would be willing to take on a small role or just donate ships.

 

All this talk about repeated hit missiles has me wondering if a Kraken rotator could be made to rotate ships when they come into physics range.  Something that could be disabled when it's your turn so the ship could maneuver and aim, and enabled when the turn is over to spin the ship fast enough to avoid repeat hits in the same spot, but not fast enough that it breaks apart.

Oh Macey Dean, we miss you... His last battle was fully unscripted, and glorious.

[max_creative]

Currently testing a slightly unfair weapon. I call it the "Kessler Cannon" basically just dumps 200 decouplers in orbit and then hopefully causes Kessler Syndrome. And then I have to test the fort knocks base. It's supposed to shoot ballistic missiles. 

Also, @ScriptKitt3h, you ships remind me of a certain triangle thing with an eye...

[panzer1b]

I know its completely unpractical, and itll only be used for cinematic purposes as an Alliance command vessel, perhaps killing something with its hypercannon, but ohh does this look epic!

What do u guys think, ohh and anyone know what its modeled after?

 

 

 

And apparently this thing is incredibly tough to kill (provided you can get past its "lagshield".  I have yet to kill it with anything (although actually hitting it is hard enough with the slowdown of the game) aside from a Tripedo-S/H (which used XL3 wheels and thus does not count).

 

Built using the same principle of the SK-CRV-IVg2 but scaled up to actually be a destroyer...

Edited May 7, 2016 by panzer1b